ML19094A346
| ML19094A346 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 04/02/1968 |
| From: | US Dept of Interior, Geological Survey (USGS) |
| To: | Price H US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) |
| References | |
| Download: ML19094A346 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20242 Mr. Harold L. Price Director of Regulation U. s. Atomic Energy Commission 4915 St. Elmo Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20545
Dear Mr. Price:
APR 2 1968 Transmitted herewith in response to a request by Mr. Roger S. Boyd, is a review of geologic and hydrologic aspects of the Surry Power Station near Surry County, Virginia, proposed by the Virginia Electric and Power Company for location of a nuclear-powered thermal electric station.
The review was prepared by H. W. Coulter and E. L. Meyer and has been discussed with members of your staff.
We have no objections to your making this review a part of the public record.
Sincerely yours, Ag_ting Director Enclosure 11.81
Surry Power Station Surry County, --Virginia AEC Docket 50-28o, 281 Hydrology The site is located on a peninsula formed by 1Bo 0 turn o:r the James River between Jamestown and Newport News and about 25 miles upstream
- from Chesapeake Bay. The river is brackish in this reach and flow reverses with the tide.
Data of freshwater runoff past the site as shown in the Preliminary Safety Analysis report appear to be reasonable. The data however do not include the drought of 1930-31 during which flows occurred that were considerably lower ~han the minimum monthly flow of 857 cfs shown.
Thus the mean flow for the period August through October 1930 was less than 700 cfs (cubic feet per second), lowest mean monthly flow was about 620 cfs and minimum flow for 7 consecutive days was about 440 cfs on the basis of records of James River at Cartersville and Appomattox River near Petersburg.
Except during periods of high runoff, tidal flow primarily accounts for the upstream and downstream currents past the site. The oscillatory flow does not directly indicate the rate of flushing out from the James Estuary of effluents added to it. In general, flushing out of effluents that remain near the surface would be at a greater rate than is indicated by the runoff, while effluents that sink to a lower depth of the river would be flushed out at a slower ratea No quantitative data are presented in the report but it may be estimated that heated effluent from the plant would remain near the surface and would be flushed out at a rate that is considerably greater than the runoff would indicate.
The site is underlain by unconsolidated beds that dip toward the sea.
Ground-water is utilized from several deeper sandy strata in these beds as well as from the uppermost quaternary deposits. The latter are extensively tapped for domestic or other small volum~ uses, except near the James River where pumping would lead to the intrusion of brackish water. In the lower strata water is found at artesian pressure because of overlying less permeable deposits. Water enters these strata principally near the Fall line where they are exposed. Wells along the James River between Claremont and Norfolk have been drawing water from this artesian aquifer since the early part of this century and the artesian head has been dropping-**stead.ily., Where this head is lower
- than the overlying surficial ground-water table local recharge from the upper ground water through the confining deposits to the artesian aquifer can occur.
1181
Radionuclides spilled at the site or deposited on the ground in the vicinity would be expected to enter the surficial ground water and migrate slowly towards the nearest stream channel. Entry into the lower aquifer could occur in areas where pumping has lowered the artesian head. Migration times through the less permeable confining beds is a matter of conjecture but could be expected to be a matter of decades.
The nearest well to the site is at Hog Island State Water Fowl Refuge about one mile from the reactor. other nearby wells are at Jamestown, Fort Eustis, and Bacons Castle.
References:
Cederstrom, D. J., 1945, Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the Coastal Plain of Southeastern Virginia: Virginia Geol. Survey, Bull. 63.
, 1957, Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the York-James
Peninsula, Virginia: u. s. Geol. Survey, Water Supply Paper 1361.
Geology The analysis of the geology of the Surry Nuclear Power Station site, Atomic Energy Connnission Docket (50-280, 281) was reviewed and compared with the available literature. The geologic_analysis is carefully derived and presents an adequate appraisal of those aspects of the geology which would be pertinent to an engineering evaluation of the site.
Although there are no identifiable geologic structures which could be expected to localize seismicity in-the immediate vicinity of the site, the area is underlain at depth ca - 1500 feet by crystalline rocks continuous with those which crop out to the west within the Piedmont Province. Hence it must be assumed that earthquakes with bedrock intensities comparable to those characteristico:of the Piedmont Province may occur in the area of the plant.
- "" ('-:>,,-
~...,.... :
,_ '*.